Comments on Why I oppose complete legalizationTypePad2006-02-27T10:56:00ZCraighttp://www.newmarksdoor.com/mainblog/tag:typepad.com,2003:http://www.newmarksdoor.com/mainblog/2006/02/last_week_i_bri/comments/atom.xml/Trent McBride commented on 'Why I oppose complete legalization'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d8341c9b9953ef00e55020a03388332006-02-28T03:03:55Z2008-02-08T06:30:57ZTrent McBrideWell, this falls far short of a persuasive argument: 1. History - again I'll persuade you to sheck out Jeff...<p>Well, this falls far short of a persuasive argument:</p>
<p>1. History - again I&#39;ll persuade you to sheck out Jeff Miron&#39;s work on the subject. History has shown us that both alcohol and drug prohibition directly caused violence. This is the number one argument against drug prohibition - and you totaly ignored it.</p>
<p>2. Institutions - this is the best leg of your argument. However, like you say, may mean little. All industrialized countries provide government funded health care, but you don&#39;t think it&#39;s a good idea. Everyone else has a minimum wage, too (so what?). Anyway, like you respect institutions, I respect individuals, and there is something unsettling about prohiiting something a decent number people don&#39;t have a moral problem with - and you can&#39;t expect success when you tried to legislate people&#39;s behavior . I&#39;ll hit you where it hurts: drug prohibition is policy bsaed on the unconstrained vision that government can coerciely change people&#39;s behavior without greater costs.</p>
<p>3. The market - your scenarios involve some pharmacologic fallacies I won&#39;t much get into here (along the lines of: cocaine and heroin are more or less pure chemicals; the only way to make them more addictive is to take more of them). I suppose you could argue this with alcohol, but A) you can&#39;t get more than 100% alcohol, and B) few people like pure grain alcohol.</p>
<p>There are more problems with your argument, and some good ones for my side that you fail to address at all.</p>Kyle N commented on 'Why I oppose complete legalization'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d8341c9b9953ef00e550351bc788342006-02-27T23:50:57Z2008-02-08T06:29:33ZKyle Nhttp://impudent.blognation.us/blogActually Jorg, if Heroin addicts can get a steady supply at a known dosage they can get along rather well....<p>Actually Jorg, if Heroin addicts can get a steady supply at a known dosage they can get along rather well. My view is that we should definitly change our drug laws. I know decriminalization of &quot;hard&quot; drugs is not politicaly viable, I also think the &quot;needlepark&quot; thing was a stupid way to try to do it. However, I can find nothing at all defensible in criminalization of Marijuana to adults. And if someone is already an addict to other drugs, they should be able to get a dosage without any fear of jail if they seek help.<br />
One thing overlooked is the factor of substitution. As any good economist can tell you most goods have substitutes. How many people who get in a fight, or drive a car or commit other mayhem under the influence of alcohol. might just chill out and get the munchies if they were high on pot?</p>JorgXMckie commented on 'Why I oppose complete legalization'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d8341c9b9953ef00e550351e7188342006-02-27T23:26:37Z2008-08-29T05:37:10ZJorgXMckieAlcohol kills its thousands every year, as well as those killed by drinking drivers. We have learned to adjust. Some...<p>Alcohol kills its thousands every year, as well as those killed by drinking drivers. We have learned to adjust. Some drugs might have effects that would make them worth banning. PCP springs to mind. However, all too frequently, the &#39;new&#39; drugs are almost always a response to the increasing price of the previously perferred drug. When morphine was outlawed for non-medical use, heroin was devised to help &#39;wean&#39; people from their morphine addiction. Look where that led. Crack was a response to elevating prices for powder cocaine.</p>
<p>People are going to seek to alter their mind state by ingestion of drugs. It&#39;s been going on forever. (My current drug of choice is caffeine, provided by waaaaay too much coffee every day.) It is not going to stop, absent a change in humans in that which drives it, and it is almost certainly both a biological and a psychological drive.</p>
<p>What can change is how *we* (society) react to the drive. Just about every culture outside of the really, really crazy Marxists allows or overlooks the use of some low-level mind-altering addictive substance. It would behoove us to consider this a bit more rationally.</p>
<p>I appreciate Craig&#39;s little c conservative approach (very Burkean -- a good approach quite often), but I feel that the Unintended Consequences of the Drug Laws outweigh the possible benefits of a much-changed approach to ordering the usage of drugs.</p>
<p>Of course, one problem with heroin addicts, especially, is that they are wildly unable to hold anything like what most of us would think of as a regular job. They are unlikely to worry about their health, either. Pushed to the limit, I suppose I would say that addicts who manage to kill themselves should be let to do so in peace. It&#39;s not like they usually expire at the wheel of a car doing 70MPH.</p>Jake commented on 'Why I oppose complete legalization'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d8341c9b9953ef00e550351d2488342006-02-27T18:42:13Z2008-08-29T23:42:59ZJakeI have more information on "Needle Park" in Zurich. In the early nineties, Zurich set aside a city park for...<p>I have more information on &quot;Needle Park&quot; in Zurich.</p>
<p>In the early nineties, Zurich set aside a city park for drug users where they would not enforce the drug laws. Drug dealers set up booths in the park. And the city provided free food and needles to anyone in the park.</p>
<p>The drug prices fell to 50% of their past levels just as many people thought they would. Drug addicts from all over the world poured into Zurich. </p>
<p>But then came the surprises:<br />
1. Crime around the park was very high as the addicts still had to steal to support their habit even though the price of drugs had fallen.<br />
2. Drug dosage increased as the price of drugs was a limiting factor in dosage before.</p>
<p>Then addicts started dying of overdose or starvation. Health workers would sweep through the park every morning and find one or two bodies. This went on for some months.</p>
<p>The Zurich officials decided a civilized society cannot assist these young people in killing themselves with drugs. They abandoned the whole experiment and started enforcing drug laws again.</p>cactus commented on 'Why I oppose complete legalization'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d8341c9b9953ef00e550209a6d88332006-02-27T18:29:19Z2008-02-08T06:29:22ZcactusI would imagine restrictions on certain items in part on the expected damage to third parties. For instance, with guns...<p>I would imagine restrictions on certain items in part on the expected damage to third parties. For instance, with guns - one might support the right of the public to be armed but draw the line at people having the right to own a tactical nuke or a stockpile of surface to air missiles. Drugs may be a similar case - if a person is using valium or marijuana, the probability of them causing damage to their neighbors as a result, and the degree of such damage, is probably rather small and could be rectified after the fact. However, if a person is using PCP, they may be more likely to attack the niehgbors&#39; kids with a machete, which isn&#39;t easily rectified after the fact. </p>Dave S commented on 'Why I oppose complete legalization'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d8341c9b9953ef00e5503521c988342006-02-27T14:50:52Z2008-08-30T11:28:31ZDave Shttp://justprocrastinating.blogspot.comTaking your logic in a different direction, what if Pfizer introduces a version of cocaine that is 10 times as...<p>Taking your logic in a different direction, what if Pfizer introduces a version of cocaine that is 10 times as awesome, 0 times as addictive and has a minty-fresh aftertaste? A little competition might make these things safer.</p>